The amount of 3 star prospects in the 1st round is reDQless and unrealistic. No one, in real life, gets drafted in the 1st round that doesn't have top 6 or top 4 potential.
The only 3star 1st rounder that could be justified is a high overall tough guy or grinder. Even that is iffy.
Also, i trade my 4th-7th for one 4th just because i dont want the useless never-gonna-be-nhlers prospects.
I think for 14 they should have an option at the start of beagm to change the potential system. Like either letters or stars
You can, go to the edit players on the main menu. You can change anybody. If anybody has been watching the world juniors; they have Murray going to between 82 & 87 after two years when he can't play 5on5, while Harrington is never good enough to make the NHL. Retarded.
You can, go to the edit players on the main menu. You can change anybody. If anybody has been watching the world juniors; they have Murray going to between 82 & 87 after two years when he can't play 5on5, while Harrington is never good enough to make the NHL. Retarded.
I HAVE PROVED IT IS NOT RANDOM!!!! So you see, I was experimenting withe player potential and I decided to pick up Mathieu Darche off of FA. I put him on my top line to see what would happen. Note: I played all games myself. And in 1 year he went up 2, then 3, then 5 then 3. So he was a 91 overall in 4 years and was Hart, Ted Lindsay, Maurice Richard, Art Ross, Conn Smythe, Frank J. Selke trophy winner in the 4th
I HAVE PROVED IT IS NOT RANDOM!!!! So you see, I was experimenting withe player potential and I decided to pick up Mathieu Darche off of FA. I put him on my top line to see what would happen. Note: I played all games myself. And in 1 year he went up 2, then 3, then 5 then 3. So he was a 91 overall in 4 years and was Hart, Ted Lindsay, Maurice Richard, Art Ross, Conn Smythe, Frank J. Selke trophy winner in the 4th
Have you tried placing him on different lines and repeating the experiment or did you do this experiment multiple times? You'll need to be able to replicate the results multiple times before I can believe you.
Galchenyuk is still just a 66 in year 3 of my GM Connected league...
Players BARELY grow if you keep them in the minors. if you have a prospect you really want to develop you absolutely have to play them on your NHL squad, top minutes( top 2 lines, PP, PK, etc) or else its useless to acquire prospects. I learned that the hard way in a GMC league. Picked up mackinnon, siemens, etem, each grew ~1-2 overall each year in the minors. played them in a top minutes in the NHL and they shot up 3-4 overall each year, depending on their stats.
so question- I really like playing as Philly and acquiring their players in GM leagues and such, but Brayden Schenn never seems to improve for me. Is this a thing that happens to everyone or am I jus being unlucky? I have heard this before, but would like some input.
Also why doesn't Columbus get the picks they deserve from LA and NYR? I didn't mind all too much until I realized that the Rangers tanked and got Mackinnon and the Kings got Pullock who is one of the surest things from my experience.
Last edited by live playoff hockey: 01-22-2013 at 10:24 AM.
I'm just seeing some abnormalities that really screws up their potential system. I think alot of this could be curve with players gaining stats in season, but keeping majority year to year
I drafted a 2.5 yellow star forward with the 210th pick in the 2013 draft.
He's my fourth line center six seasons later. Went from an either high 50s or low 60s guy to a 77 overall two-way forward. I started him on the AHL 4th line and moved him up every other year.
so question- I really like playing as Philly and acquiring their players in GM leagues and such, but Brayden Schenn never seems to improve for me. Is this a thing that happens to everyone or am I jus being unlucky? I have heard this before, but would like some input.
Also why doesn't Columbus get the picks they deserve from LA and NYR? I didn't mind all too much until I realized that the Rangers tanked and got Mackinnon and the Kings got Pullock who is one of the surest things from my experience.
At the start of your GM, you have the option to set draft picks to either classic (where every team has all their picks) or authentic (where the future picks that have already been traded to other teams belong to those teams).
Sounds like you've selected classic.
As for player development - Brayden Schenn never seems to develop all that well for some reason.
But in general - playing high potential prospects in key ice time positions (top 2 lines, top D pairings, etc), is a great way to make srue they develop well. Philly rarely play Schenn in their top 6 in Be a GM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusto73
I'm just seeing some abnormalities that really screws up their potential system. I think alot of this could be curve with players gaining stats in season, but keeping majority year to year
Much like in real life, there is a little bit of randomness and variety that the game introduces into the prospect development system.
How much you play a prospect, how well he does, and how well the team does all play a role.
For example, take the exact same prospect and put him into 2 different scenarios:
FIRST - That prospect in your minor league team, is playing first line center, putting up point-per-game numbers, and goes on 2 or 3 really good playoff runs. By 23 or 24 he's probably ready to hit your NHL team, and even give you top 6 minutes.
SECOND - That prospect is in your minor league team, which is awful, and he has no linemates that help him put up points. He struggles to put up 40 points a season, your team fail to make the playoffs. Come 23 or 24, he might be ready for the NHL, or he might not. He won't be as solid a lock as the FIRST scenario discussed.
Minor league success, both on the team and individually, is huge on prospect growth. That's what makes grooming a good young goaltender so challenging in NHL 13.
so question- I really like playing as Philly and acquiring their players in GM leagues and such, but Brayden Schenn never seems to improve for me. Is this a thing that happens to everyone or am I jus being unlucky? I have heard this before, but would like some input.
Also why doesn't Columbus get the picks they deserve from LA and NYR? I didn't mind all too much until I realized that the Rangers tanked and got Mackinnon and the Kings got Pullock who is one of the surest things from my experience.
I acquired Schenn at the beginning of my BAGM and after three seasons, no growth from him. If he isn't playing in the AHL or Top 6 minutes he isn't growing; that's the case with most prospects. Very flawed system.
Players BARELY grow if you keep them in the minors. if you have a prospect you really want to develop you absolutely have to play them on your NHL squad, top minutes( top 2 lines, PP, PK, etc) or else its useless to acquire prospects. I learned that the hard way in a GMC league. Picked up mackinnon, siemens, etem, each grew ~1-2 overall each year in the minors. played them in a top minutes in the NHL and they shot up 3-4 overall each year, depending on their stats.
Not really, I edited Ryan Kujwanski and drafted him at 75 ovrl put him in the minors and the next year he was a 83
Anyone else noticed how every prospect has a 60 faceoff rating and how it never gets better?
Do you play your prospects at center?
I traded for Zach Phillips out of Minnesota, played in 3 or 4 years in the minors, and put him into the NHL team in year 5. He's the best faceoff man on the team (I think his FO rating is 83 or 84).
I traded for Zach Phillips out of Minnesota, played in 3 or 4 years in the minors, and put him into the NHL team in year 5. He's the best faceoff man on the team (I think his FO rating is 83 or 84).
Yes of course I do. Played Galchenyuk and Granlund at center 100% of the time both in the minors and in the pros and their faceoff rating never got better and neither did any of my minor league centers including Phillips and Larsson (who I also played at center 100% of the time).
I'm wondering why goalies such as Marc-Andre Fleury and other young high rated goalies regress in overall after only one year of Be-A-GM mode. His stats were decent >.900 S% and a GAA below 2.50. If players are regressing at age 29, I'm heading back to the older games with a system that wasn't as flawed. Maybe this is just an odd case though.
Much like in real life, there is a little bit of randomness and variety that the game introduces into the prospect development system.
How much you play a prospect, how well he does, and how well the team does all play a role.
For example, take the exact same prospect and put him into 2 different scenarios:
FIRST - That prospect in your minor league team, is playing first line center, putting up point-per-game numbers, and goes on 2 or 3 really good playoff runs. By 23 or 24 he's probably ready to hit your NHL team, and even give you top 6 minutes.
SECOND - That prospect is in your minor league team, which is awful, and he has no linemates that help him put up points. He struggles to put up 40 points a season, your team fail to make the playoffs. Come 23 or 24, he might be ready for the NHL, or he might not. He won't be as solid a lock as the FIRST scenario discussed.
Minor league success, both on the team and individually, is huge on prospect growth. That's what makes grooming a good young goaltender so challenging in NHL 13.
I definitely agree with this, team success plays a huge role in player development...which is why players are so easy to develop. I'm always finding that I have to trade high quality prospects because it's so easy to guarantee success of your AHL team. Signing a good goalie, and quality forwards to your AHL team who can put up a lot of points is very easy which makes it a lot easier to guarantee your top prospects can also put up a lot of points in the AHL.
I'm wondering why goalies such as Marc-Andre Fleury and other young high rated goalies regress in overall after only one year of Be-A-GM mode. His stats were decent >.900 S% and a GAA below 2.50. If players are regressing at age 29, I'm heading back to the older games with a system that wasn't as flawed. Maybe this is just an odd case though.
That's due to the potential he's locked into. His base stats are probably a bit higher than it should be under his "potential" rating. It happens with a couple of players; I know Wheeler has this problem too.
In one BAGM I drafted Ristolainen and signed him right away. He played 3rd pairing minutes in the AHL and jumped to an 82OV after his first season, his stats weren't really that impressive. I then moved him to the 2nd pairing in the NHL the following season and he went up to an 87OV.
I've since played with a few other teams and have drafted Ristolainen multiple times and cannot repeat his development he had in my first season. I believe I was Nashville the first time.
Also I tried playing Galchenyuk on the 1st line, 1st PP and PK units over 5 straight seasons and he was only at 71OV. I've also sent him back to juniors in another BAGM and the next year he was a 73OV. So I figured that was the way to go. I did another BAGM and left Gally in juniors for one season and he didn't improve his OV at all. It seems so random, I cannot duplicate anything.
Goalies seem odd to develop I had subban who won back to back vienzas at age 24 and 25 and never got a point (stayed 83 ovr)
I also have 3 snipers who are 23/24 and never develop all stuck at 80,81,84 despite 4 star potential
And they all put up good numbers, the 84 has been top 5 goal scorers since his 2nd year every season
Kinda dosent make sinse, I have a 4.5 star C 75 ovr at age 19 that bounces between 2nd and 3rd line and had 48 PTs reg season 15 post season(in cup series now) I guess I'll see what happenens there
